THE 


PROBLEM  OF  FORESTRY 


IN 


MINNESOTA. 


REPORT  TO  THE 


State  Forestry  Board 

OF 

Minnesota. 


BY 


f 

BY  C.  A.  SCHENCK,  PH.  D., 

FORESTER  TO  THE  BII/TMORE  ESTATE,  BII/TMORE,  N.  C., 

FOREST  ASSESSOR  TO  THE  GRAND  DUCHY  OF  HESSE-DARMSTADT,  AND 

PRINCIPAL  BII/TMORE  SCHOOL  OF  FORESTRY. 


ST.  PAUL,  MINN. 
PRINTED  BY  THE  PIONEER  PRESS  COMPANY, 

1900. 


-2-g 

§g 

J  & 


30 


I! 

a  5 


fl    ^ 
1  to 

Z4  3 

^  o 
^3 
PU 


fn  CQ 

d 

S«i 


IS 
s  >> 


^  ^ 
>.  s 


THE 


PROBLEM  OF  FORESTRY 


IN 


MINNESOTA. 


REPORT  TO  THE 


State  Forestry  Board 


OF 


Minnesota. 


BY 


BY  C.  A.  SCHENCK,  PH.  D., 

FORESTER  TO  THE  BII/TMORE  ESTATE,  BII/TMORK,  N.  C., 

FOREST  ASSESSOR  TO  THE  GRAND  DUCHY  OF  HESSE-DARMSTADT,  AND 

PRINCIPAL  BII/TMORE  SCHOOL  OF  FORESTRY. 


ST.  PAUL,  MINN. 

PRINTED  BY  THE  PIONEER  PRESS  COMPANY, 
1900. 


£•, 


ORGANIZATION 


OF  THE 


Minnesota  State  Forestry  Board 


JUDSON  N.  CROSS,  President,  Minneapolis,  Minn. 

GREENLEAF  CLARK,  Vice-President,  St.  Paul,  Minn. 
C.  C.  ANDREWS,  Secretary,  St.  Paul,  Minn. 


MEMBERSHIP  OF  THE  BOARD. 

C.  C.  ANDREWS  (ex-officio  as  Chief  Fire  Warden) .- St.  Paul,  Minn. 

SAMUEL  B.  GREEN,  (ex-officio  as  Horticulturist, 

State  University), St.  Anthony  Park,   Minn. 

The  following  three  members  recommended  by  the  Regents  of  the  State  University, 
and  to  hold  for  a  term  of  four  years: 

JOHN  COOPER St.  Cloud,   Minn. 

FREDERICK  WEYERHAEUSER St.  Paul,  Minn. 

O.   M.  LORD Minnesota  City,   Minn. 

JUDSON  N.  CROSS Minneapolis,  Minn. 

(Recommended  by  the  State  Forestry  Association,  and  to  hold  for  two  years.) 

GREENLEAF  CLARK., St.  Paul,   Minn. 

(Recommended  by  the  State  Agricultural  Society,  and  to  hold  for  two  years.) 

WILLIAM  MITCHELL. .  . .,  . ; , Winona,   Minn. 

(Recommended  by  .the  Qkme  aild  7ish  Commission,  and  to  hold  for  two  years.) 

A.  L.   COLE... i Motley,   Minn. 

(In  place  of  Charles  .\.  Duncan,  of  Lhiluth,  who  was  recommended  by  the  State  Horticultural 

Society,  but  declined.)          r*     '         •**' 


CHIEF    FIRE    WART) EN. '  *125 

DR.   SCHENCK'S  REPORT. 

At  the  invitation  of  the  State  Forestry  Board  of  Minne- 
sota, Dr.  C.  A.  Schenck,  Ph.  D.,  trained  in  the  science 
and  practice  of  German  forestry  and  for  several  years 
superintendent  of  the  estate  of  Mr.  Geo.  W.  Vanderbilt 
at  Biltmore,  North  Carolina,  visited  the  forest  regions  of 
Minnesota  last  September  and  afterwards  submitted  to 
the  board  the  following  report: 

THE  PROBLEM  OF  FORESTRY   IN  MINNESOTA. 

ECONOMIC    USE    OF    THE    SOIL. 

The  possibilities  for  economic  use  of  soil  are  threefold.  Soil 
may  be  devoted  to  the  production  of  field  crops  (agriculture),  or  to 
the  production  of  animal  matter  (pasture),  or  finally  to  the  produc- 
tion of  wood  crops  (forestry).  In  America,  only  agriculture  and 
pasture  are  considered  as  soil  industries.  Land  unfit  for  either  of 
the  two  is  thrown  away.  Forestry  as  a  remunerative  use  of  national 
soil  is  entirely  disregarded.  In  the  case  of  private  individuals, 
ignorance  relative  to  the  economic  value  of  forestry  can  be  easily 
excused.  Government  itself,  be  it  of  democratic,  republican  or 
populistic  strain,  sets  the  example  in  dealing  carelessly  with  the 
forestry  problem. 

It  has  been  and  is  the  policy  of  state  and  federal  government 
to  leave  the  development  of  all  sections  of  the -country  to  private 
enterprise.  Under  this  freedom  of  action,  the  agricultural  districts 
have  shown  an  unparalleled  rate  and  steadiness  of  development. 
In  sections,  however,  where  there  is  a  comparative  scarcity  of  soil 
fit  for  such  farming  as  can  compete  in  the  general  market,  it  has 
been  and  will  be  impossible  for  private  enterprise  to  undertake  the 
development  of  the  whole  region.  Proof  of  this  statement  lies,  for  in- 
stance, in  the  Adirondacks,  in  the  Alleghanies,  in  the  pineries  of  the 
Carolinas,  and  in  certain  sections  of  Michigan,  Wisconsin  and  Min- 
nesota. At  the  present  density  of  population,  the  present  wages  of 
manual  labor  and  the  present  prices  of  field  crops,  soil  of  poor 
quality  can  be  used  only  for  pasture  or  for  sylviculture.  "Pasture 
is  not  practicable,  where  the  wintering  of  stock  cannot  be  well 
effected,  be  it  for  climatic  reasons,  be  it  for  lack  of  winter  forage. 
Pasture  is  not  permissible  where  it  results  in  rapid  deterioration 

327915 


126  ANNUAL    REPORT    OF 

of  the  soil.  Pasture  is  not  advisable  where  tree  growth  will  furnish 
a  higher  and  safer  revenue.  /""Has  it  never  occurred  to  the  men 
framing  this  country's  destin^Jiiat  on  millions  of  acres  embraced 
in  this  country,  tree  growing  might  possibly  be  the  most  remuner- 
ative industry?  Is  it  not  a  function  of  government  to  see  that 
every  acre  of  national  soil  be  devoted  to  the  most  remunerative 
production  ?  Have  our  governments,  or  rather  we,  the  people  ruling 
this  country,  done  our  duty?  Look  at  the  millions  of  acres  lying 
absolutely  unproductive  in  almost  every  state  of  the  Union.  A  few 
decades  of  years  ago  they  bore  a  growth,  a  growth  of  trees.  Now 
the  barren  appearance  of  the  soil  bears  testimony  of  our  economic 
thoughtlessness.  Private  enterprise,  after  having  made  a  clean 
sweep  of  the  primeval  trees,  did  not  find  it  practicable  to  use  the 
soil  for  forestry  or  sylviculture,  the  only  use  to  which  it  is  adapted. 
The  bare  land  was  neglected  and  cast  aside.  The  governmental 
land  policy,  when  turning  absolute  forest  land  over  to  private  en- 
terprise, ought  to  have  foreseen  the  consequences.  It  was  wrong — 
and  it  is  wrong — as  far  as  sections  unfit  for  agriculture  and  for  stock- 
raising  are  concerned.  It  is  deaf  to  the  main  demand  of  political 
economy:  "Do  not  allow  a  square  foot  of  national  soil  to  lie  idle. " 
The  small  farm  holdings  occupying  the  better  ground  in  such 
artificial  deserts,  denuded  from  tree  growth,  look  gloomy;  the  soil 
is  worn  out;  miserable  roads  and  inadequate  schools  characterize 
the  region.  Such  unpleasant  conditions  are  not  the  fruit  of  poor 
soil.  They  are  the  fruit  of  a  preposterous  use  of  poor  soil. 

In  European  countries,  poor  soil  is  used  for  forestry.  The  in- 
habitants of  forest  districts  occupy  small  villages  along  the  bottoms 
of  creeks  and  rivers;  the  little  patch  of  farm  land  does  not  feed 
the  family.  It  is  work  in  the  forest  on  which  the  backwoodsman 
chiefly  makes  his  living.  Abroad  we  find  a  strong,  energetic  popu- 
lation in  the  forests,  in  spite  of  the  poorness  of  the  soil.  In  this 
country  we  find  in  sections  productive  of  forest,  though  not  destitute 
of  it,  a  population  thriftless  and  discontented. 

There  is  nothing  new  in  these  observations.  Every  educated 
American  is  aware  of  the  facts.  Our  legislatures,  however,  have 
not  had  time  to  consider  the  forestry  question,  which  is  perhaps 
not  as  urgent,  but  in  my  opinion  more  important,  than  the  problems 
of  trusts  and  expansion. 

MINNESOTA'S  INTEREST  IN  FORESTRY. 

For  merely  agricultural  states,  like  Iowa  and  Ohio,  where  all 
land  is  fit  for  farming,  forestry  is,  of  course,  only  a  national  matter. 


CHIEF    FIRE    WARDEN.  127 

For  other  states,  and  preeminently  for  Minnesota,  it  is  a  state 
problem  of  first  importance.  By  far  the  larger  portion  of  Minne- 
sota, the  prairies  and  the  former  hardwood  belt,  contain  splendid 
farm  land.  Clearing  of  hardwood  land  is  still  in  progress,  and  we 
can  only  hope  that  on  every  acre  of  fine  soil  the  plow  will  soon 
follow  the  axe.  On  such  ground  agriculture  yields  higher  net 
returns  than  timber  growth,  and  a  small  wood  lot  on  the  farm  is 
all  the  settler  should  desire  to  maintain.  The  character  of  the 
northeastern  section  (under  northeastern  section  is  understood  the 
corner  north  of  the  47th  degree  of  latitude  and  east  of  the  95th  degree 
of  longitude)  of  Minnesota  is  entirely  different.  Farm  land — I  mean 
farm  land  about  as  good  as  prairie  land — is  scarce.  Corn  is  an 
uncertain  crop.  Nature  itself  has  designated  the  soil  as  poor  by 
raising  a  crop  of  pines  on  the  ground  —  pines  making  smaller  de- 
mands on  the  fertility  of  the  ground  than  hard  woods. 

Stock  pasture  is  possible  in  many  sections;  still  the  length  and 
severity  of  the  winter,  combined  with  the  impossibility  of  raising 
sufficient  winter  forage,  prevent  stock  farming  on  a  large  scale. 
Undoubtedly  the  most  economic  use  to  which  the  bulk  of  the  north- 
eastern section  of  Minnesota  can  be  devoted,  is  forestry.  There 
is,  of  course,  many  a  spot  on  which  potatoes  and  vegetables  can 
be  raised  and  which  allows  of  farming  on  a  small  scale.  However, 
unless  the  settler  finds  additional  and  remunerative  work  in  the 
forest  and  a  local  market  for  his  field  products  in  the  logging  camp, 
the  prospects  for  farming  are  gloomy.  In  the  northeastern  corner 
of  Minnesota,  as  far  as  the  best  use  of  the  soil  is  concerned,  forestry 
must  form  the  rule  and  farming  the  exception. 

In  the  south  and  west  of  Minnesota,  agriculture  is  the  best  pos- 
sible soil  industry,  almost  to  the  exclusion  of  the  forest.  Between 
the  typical  forest  region  of  the  northeast  and  the  typical  farm  region 
of  the  west  and  south,  lies  a  strip  where  forestry  and  agriculture 
should  occupy  equal  shares  of  soil,  always  with  a  view  of  obtaining 
the  best  economic  result  for  the  commonwealth. 

There  is  no  doubt  that  gradually  agriculture  and  forestry  would 
adjust  themselves  to  their  respective  precincts  if  the  latter  were  given 
an  equal  chance  in  the  hands  of  private  individuals.  Under  the 
conditions  prevailing  in  North  America,  however,  forestry  is  an  in- 
vestment not  sought  for  by  private  enterprise. 

THE    CAPITALIST    AND    FORESTRY. 

The  reasons  for  capital  failing  to  engage  in  forestry  lie  in  the 
danger  from  fire  to  which  forests  are  exposed ;  in  overtaxation 


128  ANNUAL    REPORT    OF 

from  the  side  of  the  county ;  further,  in  the  unwieldiness  of  for- 
estry as  a  business  —  a  quality  which  does  not  allow  of  speculation, 
of  unexpected  gains  and  of  ready  sale  —  in  the  large  size  of  the 
areas  required  for  proper  forest  management,  in  the  impossibility 
of  entailing  forest  property,  in  the  state  laws  preventing  corpora- 
tions from  controlling  over  5,000  acres  of  land,  in  the  length  of 
time  required  to  develop  a  tree  out  of  a  seedling,  in  the  uncertainty 
of  future  yields,  due  to  an  absolute  lack  of  statistics,  and  many 
other  particularities  of  forestry  which  it  would  lead  me  too  far  to 
enumerate. 

Private  individuals,  I  am  confident,  will  not  embark  in  forestry 
unless  considerable  inducements  are  offered.  These  inducements 
must  do  away  with  the  main  obstacles  to  conservative  forestry 
—preeminently  with  the  danger  from  fire.  The  forestry  problem 
of  Minnesota  is  almost  identical  with  the  forest  fire  problem.  If 
there  were  no  fires,  a  second  growth  would  invariably  follow  the 
removal  of  the  virgin  growth,  even  against  the  wish  of  the  land 
owner.  As  long  as  fires  prevail,  desolate  barrenness  takes  posses- 
sion of  the  land  after  lumbering.  Hundreds  of  thousands  of  acres 
lying  idle  in  every  state  of  the  wooded  east  and  west — in  Minne- 
sota over  2,000,000  acres — bear  witness  to  the  truth  of  the  state- 
ment. 

The  American  people  commit  a  great  economic  mistake  when 
considering  land  as  unproductive  which  is  unfit  for  agriculture. 
On  an  average,  the  annual  production  of  timber  on  an  acre  of 
forest  land  is  about  160  feet  board  measure,  worth  standing  on  the 
ground  about  40  cents. 

THE  WAGE  EARNER  AND  FORESTRY. 

Even  if  protection  from  fire  should  cost  all  of  these  40  cents, 
the  people  will  make  a  gain:  160  feet  of  lumber,  when  manufac- 
tured into  ceiling,  siding,  sheathing,  flooring,  doors,  boxes,  furni- 
ture, carriages,  paper  pulp,  etc.,  are  worth  at  least  $4.00,  the  dif- 
ference of  $3.60  consisting  almost  entirely  of  wages  earned  by 
manual  labor.  We  lose  one  of  the  best  chances  for  remunerative 
employment  of  labor  if  we  allow  forest  land  to  go  to  waste.  In 
semi-agricultural  districts,  where  work  is  scarce  during  winter, 
this  fact  weighs  doubly,  and  similar  considerations  hold  good  for 
certain  mining  districts  where  operations  are  discontinued  during 
the  cold  weather. 

If  2,000,000  acres  of  forest  land  in  Minnesota  are  lying  unpro- 
ductive, the  state  loses  annually  a  chance  for  $8,000,000  worth  of 


CHIEF    FIRE    WARDEN.  129 

manual  labor.  Another  10,000,000  acres  will  have  the  same  fate 
unless  the  people  of  Minnesota  recognize  the  necessity  of  taking 
immediate  action.  The  hygienic  and  aesthetic  drawbacks  of  defor- 
estation have  been  shown  the  people  sufficiently;  the  influence  of 
vanishing  forests  on  water  supply,  navigation  and  local  climate  is 
generally  known.  But  the  fact  that  the  practice  of  forestry  is  just 
as  necessary  on  poor  soil  as  the  practice  of  agriculture  on  good 
soil,  has  not  sufficiently  impressed  the  public  mind  yet. 

MINNESOTA'S  LAW  RELATIVE  TO.  STATE  FORESTS. 

All  land  which  the  state  of  Minnesota  now  owns,  land  of  agri- 
cultural quality  as  well  as  non-agricultural  land,  is  not  meant  to  be 
kept  for  state  purposes;  state  land  is  to  be  disposed  of,  as  soon  as 
an  opportunity  for  sale  offers  itself.  While  such  a  course,  without 
a  doubt,  in  the  case  of  soil  fit  for  farming,  is  highly  commendable 
—  in  the  case  of  nonagricultural  soil  fit  for  tree  growth  only,  it  is 
with  no  less  doubt  objectionable;  nonagricultural  land  in  Minne- 
sota, in  the  hands  of  private  individuals,  is  doomed  to  become 
and  to  lie  barren,  whilst  it  could  produce,  in  the  conservative  hands 
of  the  people,  a  sustained  yield  and  a  rising  annual  revenue. 

The  explanation  of  the  fact,  that  forestry  practiced  by  the  people 
is  sure  to  be  remunerative,  whilst  private  individuals  do  not  be- 
lieve in  it,  lies  in  the  following  points: 

1.  Forestry  is   a   clumsy  investment,    not    allowing   of   quick- 
minded  speculation,   of  sudden  gains,   of  steady,  even  annual  re- 
turns.     The  values    created    are,    to    a    large    extent,    prospective 
values,  which  do  not  allow  of  ready  sale. 

2.  The  returns  are  not  apt  to  be  higher  than  6  per  cent  on  the 
capital.      They  cannot  be  much  increased,  owing  to  natural  limita- 
tions, by  the  owner's  ingenuity. 

3.  The  investments  are  suffering  from  preposterous  taxation, 
left  at  the  mercy  of  short-sighted  county  officials. 

4.  The  forest  is  constantly  endangered  by  fires;   on  small  and 
scattering   holdings   this  danger  is  particularly  great.      The  more 
compact  and  the  larger  the  area  under  forest,  the  easier  is  forest 
protection. 

5.  The  beneficial  effect  of  the  forest  upon  water-regulation, 
climate,  public  health,  public  sport  and  recreation  is  a  return  from 
the  forest,  that  does  not  flow  into  the  pockets  of  an  individual 
owner,  whilst  for  the  people  these  blessings  offered  by  the  forest 
are  worth  many  a  dollar. 


130  ANNUAL    REPORT    OF 

Recognizing  the  truth  of  these  points,  the  legislature  of  the 
state  of  Minnesota  has  created  a  state  board  of  forestry  and  has 
authorized  it  to  accept  gifts  of  land  for  forestry  purposes.  Al- 
though tentative  only  in  its  immediate  bearing,  the  step  was  decisive 
in  as  far  as  it  acknowledges  the  advisability  of  a  state  forestry 
system.  If  the  gifts  expected  to  be  made  by  private  generosity 
consist  of  small  and  scattering  tracts  only,  the  state  board  will  find 
it  difficult  to  make  the  undertaking  yield  immediate  returns,  espe- 
cially so  if  the  tracts  are  entirely  denuded  of  timber.  For  in  that  case 
a  considerable  outlay  is  required  in  order  to  artificially  replant  the 
land,  which,  if  mother-trees  were  left,  would  have  been  done  by 
nature  alone.  The  expense  of  reforestation,  using  5,000  seedlings 
of  white  pine  per  acre,  will  be  about  $11.25.  The  annual  appro- 
priation put  at  the  disposition  of  the  Minnesota  State  Forestry 
Board  ($1,000)  will  allow  it  to  annually  reforest  about  90  acres  of 
denuded  land.  The  development  of  such  plantations  is  shown  by 
the  enclosed  photographs  taken  on  the  Biltmore  estate,  where 
about  300  acres  of  abandoned  farmland  -were  replanted  with  white 
pine.  It  is  worth  mentioning  that  no  pine  species,  in  my  opinion, 
is  more  easily  transplanted  and  raised  than  white  pine.  The  suc- 
cess is  more  certain  still,  if  only  a  few  years  have  elapsed  since  the 
denudation  of  the  land.  Before  planting,  the  debris  left  on  the 
ground  should  be  burned,  so  as  to  reduce  the  danger  from  fires. 

If  land  cut  over  and  not  bare  of  timber  should  be  deeded  to  the 
state  for  reserve  purposes,  a  different  course  must  be  followed. 
Artificial  planting  can  be  dispensed  with,  unless  the  soil  is  covered 
exclusively  with  worthless  brush.  Protection  from  fire  is  the  main 
task.  The  best  specimens  of  valuable  species,  if  dangerously  sup- 
pressed by  worthless  poplars  or  birches,  might  be  given  slight 
assistance.  An  absolute  freeing,  however,  is  not  advisable.  Every 
case  has  its  own  requirements.  There  does  not  exist  any  general 
prescription  fitting  every  case,  in  forestry  no  more  than  in  medicine. 
Every  case  must  be  dealt  with  according  to  its  peculiar  necessities, 
— always  with  the  best  monetary  result  at  stake.  In  forestry,  it 
cannot  be  repeated  often  enough,  there  is  no  more  room  for  senti- 
ment than  there  is  in  agriculture. 

Should  private  generosity  put  the  state  forestry  board  in  charge 
of  any  virgin  forests  containing  marketable  timber,  the  board 
should  at  once  proceed  to  sell  the  mature  and  hyper-mature  trees 
to  the  highest  bidder.  Whilst  these  "idlers"  are  being  removed, 
a  young  growth  of  seedlings  will  establish  itself  free  of  charge, 
provided  that  fires  are  kept  out.  If  the  cutting  proceed  gradually 


? 


Hi 


li 


CHIEF    FIRE    WARDEN.  131 

towards  the  prevailing  wind  direction,  damage  from  wind-falls  can 
be  greatly  restricted.  Obviously  the  logging  expenses  under  for- 
estry are  slightly  higher  than  in  destructive  lumbering.  The  pro- 
spective value  of  the  second  growth  started  by  forestry  will,  how- 
ever, more  than  offset  the  excess  of  logging  expenses,  or,  which  is 
the  same,  the  smaller  stumpage  prices  obtained. 

If  an  industry  works  at  a  loss,  it  should,  of  course,  not  be  main- 
tained artificially.  Forestry,  however,  never  works  at  a  loss;  I  do 
not  hesitate  to  say,  it  is  the  only  industry  which  never  knows  finan- 
cial failure.  Proof  of  my  testimony  lies  in  200  years  of  forest 
history  abroad.  A  seedling  once  well  planted  is  sure  to  develop 
into  a  tree;  and  as  sure  as  the  value  of  a  tree  is  higher  than  the 
value  of  a  seedling,  forestry  pays  interest  on  the  capital  invested 
and  repays  the  capital.  True,  the  interest  is  small,  being  counter- 
balanced by  expenses  for  protection,  administration  and  taxes,  all  of 
which  accumulate  at  compound  interest  up  to  the  year  at  which  the 
trees  reach  maturity.  If,  however,  protection  and  administration 
are  done  on  a  large  scale,  the  annual  charges  per  acre  of  forest  are 
small;  and  if  the  assessment  of  forest  land  is  not  at  the  mercy 
of  shortsighted  county  politicians,  2  to  4  per  cent  of  annual  inter- 
est on  the  investment  will  be  left,  even  if  stumpage  prices  do  not 
rise  in  the  future.  Thus  the  forest  will  yield  small  but  safe  inter- 
est. High  returns  from  forestry  are  impossible,  because  trees, 
generally,  speaking,  do  not  grow  at  a  lo-per-cent  rate.  They  grow 
slowly,  but  they  grow  as  regularly  as  the  sun  shines,  the  rain  falls, 
the  wind  blows;  for  sunshine,  rainfall  and  air  are  the  components 
of  wood. 

The  federal  and  state  laws  dealing  with  land  problems  are 
framed  only  to  suit  the  character  of  agriculture.  The  acquisition 
of  large  tracts,  so  essential  for  forestry,  is  rendered  almost  im- 
possible. The  entailing  of  real  estate  so  necessary  where  decades 
of  years  lie  between  time  of  planting  and  time  of  harvesting,  as  is 
the  case  in  forestry,  is  unconstitutional.  Corporations,  which  by 
an  issue  of  shares,  marketable  on  exchange,  might  facilitate  the 
salableness  of  forest  property,  are  not  allowed  to  own  over  5,000 
acres  of  land.  The  land  laws  induce  the  settler  to  rather  become  a 
land  speculator — but  there  is  no  room  for  land  speculation  in 
forestry. 

The  practice  of  selling  absolute  forest  land  in  small  lots  must 
result  in  forest  destruction  and  the  people  allowing  it  to  continue 
are  guilty  of  a  criminal  neglect.  Settlers  farming  such  land,  when 
the  soil  is  exhausted  and  when  no  work  is  available  in  the  deserted 


e 


132  ANNUAL    REPORT    OF 

neighborhood,  become  a  prey  of  disappointment  and  demoralization. 
Still,  under  existing  laws,  the  government  is  not  permitted,  to  with- 
draw such  land  from  private  sale  and  to  embark  in  forestry  as  a 
business  on  its  own  account,  industrial  functions  of  government 
not  being  considered  democratic. 

THE    VIRGIN    FOREST. 

The  primeval  forest  containing  many  thousand  feet  board  measure 
per  acre  is  not  at  all  the  forester's  ideal.  Such  a  forest  is  unproduc- 
tive; the  annual  formation  of  wood  is  exactly  offset  by  the  annual 
deterioration  and  death  of  hyper-mature  trees.  Ths  primeval  for- 
est is  an  idling  capital,  is  economically  objectionable. 

I  have  said  elsewhere  that  sunshine,  air  and  rain  are  the  chief 
factors  of  wood.  The  forester  simply  "bottles"  those  three  ingre- 
dients into  tree-boles.  As  the  same  causes  must  have  the  same 
effect,  under  otherwise  equal  conditions,  a  given  amount  of  leafy 
surface  and  root  system,  whether  it  belongs  to  young  saplings, 
middle-aged  poles  or  old  trees,  must  necessarily  form  an  equal 
amount  of  wood.  Hence  the  young  forest,  containing  only  1,000 
feet  board  measure  grows  at  a  high  rate  of  interest;  the  old — although 
sound — forest  grows  at  a  rate  of  about  i  ^  per  cent.  As  soon  as  a  for- 
est ceases  to  grow  at  a  sufficient  rate,  it  must  be  cut  and  replaced  by 
a  new  forest.  Nature  is  ready  to  answer  the  task  of  regeneration. 
Since  thousands  of  years  it  has  replaced  one  generation  of  the  for- 
est by  another.  There  is  no  reason  why  it  should  stop  work  at 
the  threshold  of  the  2oth  century,  if  men  do  not  change  the  natural 
conditions. 

THE    IDEAL    FOREST. 

The  large  majority  of  the  trees  in  the  ideal  forest  consist  of 
small  specimens;  for  only  those  grow  at  a  high  rate  of  interest. 
The  oldest  ones,  towering  over  an  abundant  progeny  of  second 
growth,  are  removed  when  they  reach  the  minimum  rate  of  growth 
permissible,  much  for  the  benefit  of  the  progeny,  which  after  their 
parents'  death  enjoy  the  unrestricted  blessings  of  sunshine,  rain 
and  air. 

In  the  ideal  forest,  some  trees  are  10,  others  20,  30,  40,  50,  and 
so  on,  years  old.  Suppose  the  oldest  ones,  100  years  old,  are  now 
removed.  They  will  be  replaced  quickly  by  young  seedlings  fill- 
ing the  gap.  The  forester  returning  to  that  neighborhood  after 
10  years,  finds  a  composition  of  the  forest  identical  with  the  one 
previously  met  with.  Trees  previously  90  years  old  are  now  100 


CHIEF    FIRE    WARDEN.  133 

years  old,  and  the  forester  again  proceeds  to  remove  the  centen- 
aries, the  oldest  age  class. 

The  average  stand  of  trees  per  acre  in  the  ideal  forest  is  little, 
say  2,000  feet  to  4,000  feet  board  measure  per  acre.  It  must  be  the 
forester's  aim  to  reduce  the  stumpage  found  in  the  primeval  forest 
as  quickly  as  possible  to  the  ideal  figure.  Only  that  amount  of  capi- 
tal is  left  in  the  forest  which  yields  the  highest  interest  in  the 
safest  manner. 

There  are,  of  course,  many  difficulties  and  drawbacks  associated 
with  a  course  as  outlined.  The  lumbering  expenses  are  increased; 
the  storm  is  apt  to  play  havoc  in  the  new  forest,  at  least  to  begin 
with;  insect  plagues  are  to  be  feafed;  the  owner's  capital  is  kept 
scattered  over  a  large  area,  etc.  Still,  these  inconveniences  and 
dangers  weigh  little  compared  with  the  influence  which  reckless 
taxation  has  on  the  amount  of  revenue  obtainable  from  the  invest- 
ment and  which  forest  fires  exercise  on  the  safety  of  the  capital  en- 
gaged. 

NECESSARY    PREMISES    FOR    PRIVATE    FORESTRY. 

Give  the  wood-owning  lumbermen  protection  against  hypertaxa- 
tion  and  protection  against  conflagration,  and  he  will  practice  for- 
estry on  nonagricultural  land,  because  it  will  pay  him  best  to  do 
so.  In  addition,  cancel  the  law  preventing  companies  from  holding 
over  5,000  acres  of  land;  gather  statistical  data  relative  to  the  rate 
of  tree  growth,  through  the  St.  Anthony  Park  station  so  well 
equipped  for  the  task,  so  as  to  do  away  with  the  uncertainty  envel- 
oping the  financial  possibilities  of  tree  growth.  If  you  want  to 
develop  a  desirable  industry  you  will  have  to  offer  inducements 
allowing  that  industry  to  become  remunerative. 

As  regards  taxation,  it  is  unwise  to  leave  forest  property  at  the 
mercy  of  mere  local  authority.  All  nonagricultural  land,  with  the 
help  of  the  geological  survey,  should  be  singled  out  and  its  taxation 
regulated  by  state  authority.  Young  trees  yielding  a  revenue  only 
after  decades  of  years  cannot  stand  much  taxation.  The  state  de- 
riving a  direct  benefit  from  the  maintenance  of  forests,  should  be 
held  to  bear  part  of  the  tax  burden. 

As  regards  protection  from  fire,  the  state  of  Minnesota,  through 
its  fire-warden  system,  has  made  a  timid  step  in  the  proper  direc- 
tion. That  amount  of  safety  however,  which  the  owner  of  the 
forest  requires  for  it,  cannot  be  secured  at  the  small  appropriation 
set  aside  for  forest  protection.  Unless  the  comparatively  small 


134  ANNUAL    REPORT    OF 

revenue  derivable  from  forestry  is  absolutely  safe,  no  one  will  care 
for  forestry  as  an  investment. 

I        "Economy,   is   the  highest  virtue  of  a  legislature."     But  is  it 
/  economy  to  allow  millions  of  acres  to  lie  or  to  get  barren,  millions 
'    of  dollars  to  escape  the  laboring  classes  of  the  future,  because  the 
•     state  cannot  afford  $50,000  annually  for  forest  protection?     Is  it 
possible  that  the  pffovincral  functions  of  government  are  not  suffi- 
ciently understood  under  the  regime  of  democracy?     If  everything 
is  done  "by  the  people,  for  the  people  and  through  the  people," 
why  not  forest  protection? 

I  do  not  know  whether  constitutional  restrictions  prevent  the 
rescue  of  forestry  from  its  main  adversaries,  fires  and  taxes;  but  if 
they  do,  why  not  change  the  constitution?  A  constitution  which 
does  not  allow  of  adaptation  to  changed  economic  conditions,  is 
not  for  the  good  of  the  people.  If  for  one  reason  or  another,  pri- 
vate forestry  cannot  be  made  a  remunerative  undertaking  through 
state's  authority  and  aid,  then  the  state  itself  will  have  to  embark 
in  forestry. 

The  interdependence  between  the  prosperity  of  the  various  forms 
of  industry  is  nowhere  better  understood  than  in  the  United  States. 
The  industry  of  a  country  is  a  quadruped,  with  manufacture  for 
the  head  and  with  the  three  soil  industries  (agriculture,  mining, 
forestry)  and  transportation  for  the  legs.  Cutting  off  one  of  the 
legs,  we  cripple  the  entire  animal. 

The  decision  whether  private  forestry  shall  be  made  remunerative 
at  the  expense  of  the  state,  or  whether  state  forestry  shall  be  estab- 
lished, must  be  left  to  the  legislature.  To  me,  a  combination  of 
both  methods  seems  most  advisable.  The  state  should  practice 
forestry  on  all  non  agricultural  land  owned  by  it,  after  clearing  its 
title  to  land  forfeited  for  nonpayment  of  taxes,  and  private  indi- 
viduals should  be  induced  to  practice  forestry  on  their  holdings  of 
nonagricultural  character.  The  advantage  of  the  combined  system 
is  its  greater  elasticity.  Finding  that  the  one  branch  is  cheaper 
and  more  effective  than  the  other,  we  can  gradually  emphasize  the 
one  and  abandon  the  other.  To  judge  from  a  century's  experience 
abroad,  state  forestry  is  the  more  advisable  system.  It  is  more 
stable,  bears  better  regard  to  the  people's  interest  in  the  forest  and 
spends  a  comparatively  small  sum  for  administration  and  protec- 
tion. Under  the  combined  system,  the  governmental  staff  of  for- 
esters can  at  the  same  time  protect  the  private  forests  from  fires 
and  assist  in  their  proper  assessment  for  tax  purposes. 


CHIEF   FIRE    WARDEN.  135 

FEDERAL    COOPERATION. 

The  United  States  Government  can  be  justly  held  to  concur  in 
paying  the  forestry  expenses  of  states  containing  nonagricultural 
land,  the  people  as  a  whole  drawing  advantage  from  a  state  forestry 
system.  A  division  of  fbrestry  already  exists  at  Washington,  ad- 
mirably managed  by  Mr.  Gifford  Pinchot.  The  cooperation  of  its 
officers  can  be  had  almost  free  of  charge.  If  federal  money  is  en- 
gaged in  Minnesota's  forestry,  federal  forest  authorities  must  be. 
allowed  to  watch  its  proper  application.  The  American  people  pay 
for  the  administration  of  the  United  States  forest  reserves  in  the  far 
West.  Is  it  unjust  to  demand  that  the  people  as  a  whole  bear  a 
share  of  an  expense  which  is  incurred — to  a  large  extent — for  the 
benefit  of  the  people  as  a  whole,  be  it  in  the  East  or  in  the  West, 
in  the  North  or  in  the  South? 

In  Minnesota,  the  federal  government  still  owns  several  million 
acres  of  nonagricultural  land.  This  land  should  be  withdrawn 
from  the  market,  as  long  as  conservative  use  of  its  resources  in  the 
hands  of  private  parties  is  impossible,  private  forestry  being  unre- 
munerative.  All  mature  timber,  of  course,  should  be  sold  as  early 
as  possible,  and  from  the  receipts  the  expense  for  forest  adminis- 
tration and  forest  development  should  be  covered.  If  an  arrange- 
ment can  be  made  by  which  the  administration  of  federal  and  state 
forests,  and  the  protection  of  private  woodlands  can  be  combined, 
being  placed  in  charge  of  one  and  the  Same  official  staff,  the  expense 
for  forestry  in  Minnesota  will  be  a  minimum  and  its  efficiency  a 
maximum. 

Love  of  the  forests  alone  will  never  bring  about  forestry.  The 
people  ruling  this  country  must  be  made  to  see  the  intrinsic  eco- 
nomic importance  of  forestry.  Every  leader  of  the  public  mind,  every 
teacher,  every  preacher,  every  county  and  state  officer,  must  con- 
sider it  his  duty  to  draw  the  people's  attention  to  the  necessity  of  a 
forest  system.  There  is  no  room -for  selfishness  in  the  forestry 
propaganda.  The  advocate  of  forestry  can  only  be  a  man  devoted 
more  to  his  country  than  to  his  private  interests.  He  will  have  to 
battle  against  the  state's  main  enemy,  the  egotism  of  its  various 
constituents,  fearing  loss  of  taxes  for  the  county,  or  loss  of  a  chance 
to  obtain  timber  at  a  small  price.  He  will  have  to  brave  the  vocif- 
erations of  those  public  leaders  who  offer  to  the  people  at  random 
what  the  people  like  to  hear,  the  war-cry  against  increased  public 
expenses.  As  long  as  the  people  are  taught  to  love  the  dollar  kept 
in  the  pocket  better  than  the  dollar  spent  for  the  country,  forestry 
will  have  a  poor  chance  to  develop. 


135  ANNUAL    REPORT    OF 

I  may  be  permitted  to  recapitulate  the  legal  steps,  which,  in  my 
opinion,  the  people  of  Minnesota  ought  to  take  towards  forestry: 

I.  A  law  ordering  a  survey  to  be  made,  by  which  the  nonagri- 
cultural  townships  and  sections  of  townships  shall  be  denned. 

II.  A  law  pertaining  to  clear — through  the  medium  of  courts, 
attorneys  and  surveyors — the  state's  title  to  land  forfeited  for  non- 
payment of  taxes. 

III.  A  law  creating  an  organized  staff  of  forest  guards,  whose 
duty  it  shall  be   to  efficiently  protect  all  private  forests,  and  to 
enforce  the  laws  enacted  relative  to  federal  and  state  forests  and 
forest  lands.     This  staff  might,  at  the  same  time,  have  the  duties 
of  fish  and  game  wardens. 

IV.  A  law  regulating  the  assessment  of  nonagricultural  land 
(compare  No.  I)  for  taxation  purposes. 

V.  A  law  allowing  companies  to  own  tracts  comprising  over 
5,000  acres  for  forestry  purposes. 

VI.  A  law  providing  means  for  investigating  the  financial  pos- 
sibilities of  forestry. 

C.  A.   SCHENCK. 


